BaptistBoard.com  
     

Increase font size: 0, 10, 25, 50%
Register FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Left Container Right Container
 
Go Back   BaptistBoard.com > Baptist FELLOWSHIP Forums (Baptist Only) > Baptist History

Baptist History Let's talk about Baptist history

Fewer Ads for Registered Users - Register Now!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-18-2012, 12:00 PM
Tom Butler Tom Butler is online now
9,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Paducah, Ky
Posts: 9,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiffen View Post
The fact is that the Trail of Blood is a propaganda manual and not real history.

Vedder's History of the Baptists and Torbet and McBeth's History is much better. For a Spiritual Kinship relationship between the Anabaptist and Baptist heritage, read Estep's The Anabaptist Story.
I've read a number of attacks on the Trail of Blood on this board, but I don't think I've ever read anyone who provided documentation of the criticism. It's always similar to your evaluation, that it's not real history, and not provable.

But never do I see any examples.

Some criticism is of the groups cited by Landmarkers as part of the succession link. Most of the time is that one or more of them held to weird beliefs, which seems to automatically eliminate them as a progenitor of Baptists.

Maybe on another thread we could get some arguments from each side fleshed out with more than just a flat statement. I don't want to derail this one, so Brother Kiffen, the ball is in your court.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-18-2012, 12:15 PM
tinytim tinytim is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 11,250
Default

Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.
__________________
Life is fragile, hand yours over to the one that will handle it with care... His name is Jesus!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-18-2012, 06:05 PM
Tom Butler Tom Butler is online now
9,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Paducah, Ky
Posts: 9,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytim View Post
Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.
Tim, it would be helpful if you would provide specifics regarding the Donatists and Montanists and any others you consider heretical.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-18-2012, 07:05 PM
HeirofSalvation HeirofSalvation is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ocala
Posts: 1,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytim View Post
Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.
This is sheer equivocation and a genetic fallacy
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-18-2012, 07:08 PM
HeirofSalvation HeirofSalvation is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ocala
Posts: 1,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squire Robertsson View Post
Go ahead, just as long as you realize "The Trail of Blood" is a Reader's Digest Condensed Book version of Baptist History. The pamphlet consists of the author's lecture notes and a chart he used to illustrate his lectures on Baptist History. Regretfully, he did not write his notes up to meet academic standards. However, I would suggest you devour volume one of either John Christian's or Thomas Armitage's History of Baptists. Both of these books are written in the same line as "The Trail of Blood." So, they will help you fill in and bridge the low parts of the trail.
I would add G.H. Orchards "History of Baptists" as a well-documented source as well.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-19-2012, 12:31 AM
rsr's Avatar
rsr rsr is offline
7,000 posts club
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SW Oklahoma
Posts: 9,327
Default

I would rather, if you want an earlier histories, that you read A.H. Newman's works: "A History of the Baptist Churches in the United States" and "A History of Anti-Pedobaptism." Newman was a proponent of spiritual succesionsm.
__________________
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken." Oliver Cromwell
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-19-2012, 12:38 AM
preachinjesus preachinjesus is offline
6,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: USA...somewhere along the edges
Posts: 6,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Butler View Post
Tim, it would be helpful if you would provide specifics regarding the Donatists and Montanists and any others you consider heretical.
Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-19-2012, 11:16 AM
Chad Whiteley Chad Whiteley is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lake Isabella, CA
Posts: 107
Default

In my seminary work, I did a survey of Montanism. There are a number of histories that detail their heresies.

The Donatists were much more normal, but believed that a pure clergy was necessary for the ordinance of baptism. I am not sure I would consider them heretics in the same vein as Manicheans or Arians.

That being said...

As a believer in the local church, I do not need to follow either the Catholic Church or the schismatics. I believe that scriptural local churches existed in either or both sides of these schisms. I can not deny that and still be a believer in the scriptures.

Jesus' words in Matthew 28 were very clear to me, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

I am with you until the end of the world. The injuction was clear... go, evangelize, baptist, and catechize until the end of the world. Jesus will be with you as you do. If there was no scriptural baptism for hundreds of years, the Jesus was a liar to promise it.

Further, there is a scriptural pattern to the way that someone is scripturally added to the church. According to the description of Luke in the book of Acts, "those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day" (Acts 2:41).

The biblical pattern is salvation, then baptism, then addition to the church. This pattern must be followed in order to have a scirptural assembly. The Lord in his Word several times promised that such scriptural assemblies would perpetuate throughout human history.

I believe Jesus!

Which is why there are histories that detail the history of those, who, according to the Martyrs Mirror were "baptized only upon Confession of Faith...." Yes, there has been scriptural baptism throughout the ages. Those congregations who baptized those who had already come to faith. Baptists are part of that movement that started with Christ building his first church during his personal minsitry.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-19-2012, 12:27 PM
The Biblicist's Avatar
The Biblicist The Biblicist is offline
10,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 11,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by preachinjesus View Post
Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.
I have done some extensive research on this topic both in college and seminary and throughout 40 years of ministry.

I think before any meaningful discussion can occur one must first evaluate the sources from which the material is going to be drawn. I think you will agree that nearly all pre-19th century Baptist historians wrote from the perspective that original source materials were highly biased and had to be interpreted accordingly. Robert Robinson who wrote one of the early histories of Baptists devoted the first chapter to that very subject with explanations of how those sources operated.

Has anyone studied secular church history from the prophetic materials found in the New Testament that predict its course until the Second coming??? In other words, does the New Testament make inspired predictions of the course of post-apostolic history of New Testament congregations?? I have studied the scriptures from this perpsective and I personally believe that the view of inspired prophetic writers must be considered in order to handle later secular sources correctly.
__________________
To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. - Isa. 8:20

Arminianism is simply a religious expression of Humanism that makes man the captain of his own destiny. If the child of God cannot "will" or "do" anything pleasing to God apart from God working it in him (Philip. 2:13) how in the world does the Arminian think the lost man can?????
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-20-2012, 12:59 AM
Tom Butler Tom Butler is online now
9,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Paducah, Ky
Posts: 9,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by preachinjesus View Post
Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.
I'll take all you want to give.

All I was saying in a previous post was that those who criticize Baptist successionism rarely post evidence, just make flat statements. If we're going to have a discussion here, then let's document our positions. You, Biblicist, Squire, Heir and Chad are doing fine so far. I'd like to see more specifics.

I don't think there's much disagreement over perpetuity--it's successionism which stirs things up.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:21 PM.


The Fundamental Top 500   The Best Baptist Web Sites at Baptist411.com  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Style Copyright: Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forum
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
 
 

Web Hosting for BaptistBoard.com is provided by BaptistHost.net